More History Before 1967

[georgephillip]

George... prove you're NOT a platypus.

That is, after all, how this works, right? One person makes an absurd accusation, and the other person then has to disprove it.

So... prove you're not a platypus.

Only in the minds of ESL hasbara hacks does a platypus bear the slightest resemblance to Avraham Stern:

"During World War II, Lehi initially sought alliance with Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany, offering to fight alongside them against the British in return for the transfer of all Jews from Nazi-occupied Europe to Palestine.[2]

"On the belief that Nazi Germany was a lesser enemy of the Jews than Britain, Lehi twice attempted to form an alliance with the Nazis.[2] During World War II it declared that it would establish a Jewish state based upon 'nationalist and totalitarian principles'.[2]

"After Stern's death in 1942, the new leadership of Lehi began to move it towards support of Joseph Stalin's Soviet Union.[1] In 1944 Lehi officially declared its support for National Bolshevism."

Lehi (group) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm afraid I can't continue this discussion with you until you prove to us, with verifiable sources, that you are not a platypus.

Or maybe you're just another timid propagandist"

"In June 1948, with hundreds of Palestinian villages already ‘cleansed’, senior Jewish National Fund official Yosef Weitz met with Israel’s first Prime Minister Ben-Gurion to discuss recommendations made by the so-called 'Transfer Committee'.

The five specific proposals were to destroy villages, prevent Palestinians cultivating their land, settle Jews in some of the empty communities, pass relevant legislation, and employ propaganda against a return. According to Weitz,

"Ben-Gurion 'agreed to the whole line'.

A new hasbara campaign: Countering the 'Arab Narrative' - Opinion - Al Jazeera English

 

[Hossfly]

A link and excerpt from the Saudi peace plan has been reproduced in two places here now. The official position of the PA is that they will base peace on a sovereign state using '67 borders, with a few minor adjustments either way as a guide, and settlement of the refugee issue, mutual recognition, and the opening of trade and other links included. That's one heck of a concession- asking for only 22% of what was once their country.

Where do you come up with this "their country" mumbo jumbo? God gave Israel the land and that's written in stone.

Indeed, the great realtor in the sky.

Heres the property. Wheres "Palestine"?

1947-1948 Map.


Map (enlarged) - UN Partition & The First Arab/Israeli War 1947 - 1948 - 175 - Israeli-Palestinian Conflict - ProCon.org

 

[toastman]

Do you have any idea what percentage of the IDF believe God created the world for Jews?
What percentage of Hesder Yeshivat graduates hold such beliefs?

The belief that God created the world for Jews???
I'd say .000001% , if that

You've never been to Israel, you've likely never met an IDF soldiers and you have no idea about what is taught in the IDF, so why make such outlandish claims .
I am Jewish, I went to Jewish elementary and Jewish high school. I've been to Israel over ten times and i have well over 50 relatives there (like 98% of my family lives there). All of them were in the army, and some are still in the army. I have NEVER once heard this claim that 'God created the world for Jews',. Like, never.

Please George, stop trying to vilify Jewish people by bringing up this crap, it's simply not true.

Toast, I'm not trying to vilify all Jewish people; I'm trying to point out to everyone who has never visited Israel, the West Bank, or Gaza how biased some Jewish people (and their supporters) are when it comes to criticizing racist, religious fundamentalism and the role it plays in Palestine.

Your side is absolutely right to criticize racist religious Arabs for their desire to exterminate the Jews in Israel; however, imho, you do yourself a disservice when you don't condemn the significant number of elite Jews in Israel, like the chief military rabbi who labelled Operation Cast Lead a "religious war."

"Chief military rabbi, Brigadier General Avichai Rontzki, called Operation Cast Lead a 'religious war' in which it was 'immoral' to show mercy to an enemy of 'murderers'. Many others feel the same way, prominently among them graduates of Hesder Yeshivat schools that combine extremist religious indoctrination with military service to defend the Jewish state."

Al-Ahram Weekly | Focus | Religious fundamentalism in Israel

Would you be surprised to find out the biggest threat to Israel comes from its most religious citizens?

I don't agree that they're the biggest threat, but I do believe that the religious extremists on both sides are one of the main factors as to why peaceis a long way away, if it even reaches there.
Do you believe that being a big threat to the country is the same as being the main deterrent in a peace deal being reached ?

 

[georgephillip]

The belief that God created the world for Jews???
I'd say .000001% , if that

You've never been to Israel, you've likely never met an IDF soldiers and you have no idea about what is taught in the IDF, so why make such outlandish claims .
I am Jewish, I went to Jewish elementary and Jewish high school. I've been to Israel over ten times and i have well over 50 relatives there (like 98% of my family lives there). All of them were in the army, and some are still in the army. I have NEVER once heard this claim that 'God created the world for Jews',. Like, never.

Please George, stop trying to vilify Jewish people by bringing up this crap, it's simply not true.

Toast, I'm not trying to vilify all Jewish people; I'm trying to point out to everyone who has never visited Israel, the West Bank, or Gaza how biased some Jewish people (and their supporters) are when it comes to criticizing racist, religious fundamentalism and the role it plays in Palestine.

Your side is absolutely right to criticize racist religious Arabs for their desire to exterminate the Jews in Israel; however, imho, you do yourself a disservice when you don't condemn the significant number of elite Jews in Israel, like the chief military rabbi who labelled Operation Cast Lead a "religious war."

"Chief military rabbi, Brigadier General Avichai Rontzki, called Operation Cast Lead a 'religious war' in which it was 'immoral' to show mercy to an enemy of 'murderers'. Many others feel the same way, prominently among them graduates of Hesder Yeshivat schools that combine extremist religious indoctrination with military service to defend the Jewish state."

Al-Ahram Weekly | Focus | Religious fundamentalism in Israel

Would you be surprised to find out the biggest threat to Israel comes from its most religious citizens?

I don't agree that they're the biggest threat, but I do believe that the religious extremists on both sides are one of the main factors as to why peaceis a long way away, if it even reaches there.
Do you believe that being a big threat to the country is the same as being the main deterrent in a peace deal being reached ?

Good question.
I would think the biggest threat to both nations is their religious fundamentalists.
Since the monopoly of violence is controlled by Jews, I don't see any potential for negotiations among equals leading to a two-state solution.
Do you think religion could divide the Jewish state, leading to the world's first civil war with nuclear weapons available to both sides?

 

[MHunterB]

George I think your anti-religious mania is preventing you from understanding just how tiny is the extreme end of the religious fringe upon which you've fixated there..... the entire idea of 'supremacism' is actually ANATHEMA to mainstream and normative Judaism (ie, Reform, Recon, Conservative, Orthodox 'streams' and Ashkenazi/Sephardi/Mizrachi cultures) .

I'm tired of your pushing this rabid extremist swill as though it's some 'legit' part of a discussion. LOOK at you sources, all avowed enemies of the State of Israel, and IMHO of the Jewish People (yeah, yeah, technically the individuals you've cited are the children of Jewish parents, but they seem to be stuck in the 'rebellious' phase).

No one has denied that extremist nutbars exist within the Jewish religious community. I DO wonder at your continual attempt to focus on this minute group of far extremists, especially since you've already found it necessary to try to explain that you're not attempting to demonize the Jewish people as a whole..... Not that I think you have the slightest concern for how insulting or disgusting your words are to any of us, LOL!

I'm not the least bit interested in discussing your malignant fantasies regarding the future of Israel nor the Jewish People. You'll have to proceed with such daydreams without me.........

 

[RoccoR]

georgephillip, et al,

Dangerous ground.

Good question.
I would think the biggest threat to both nations is their religious fundamentalists.
Since the monopoly of violence is controlled by Jews, I don't see any potential for negotiations among equals leading to a two-state solution.
Do you think religion could divide the Jewish state, leading to the world's first civil war with nuclear weapons available to both sides?

(COMMENT)

There probably is very little question to the idea that "religious extremism" is a major regional threat. Clearly there is a potential for Sunni 'vs' Shi'ite (Hezbollah, Iran, Syria in conflict with Hamas, Jordanian, Saudi Arabia); as well as the wider Jewish 'vs' Islamic rivalry.

While I totally disagree that Israel has a "monopoly of violence;" the two-state solution (however many options there are now) is contingent on the premise that the Hostile Arab/Palestinian (HoAP) evolves to the degree that Israel can withdrawal without fear of the HoAP re-building an insurgency that threatens the sovereign integrity of Israel.

A nuclear conflict is a dead-end for both cultures (Jewish 'vs' Islamic). In such an exchange, the consequences will be devastating for the heritage of both sides. In addition to the threat it would pose to every religious site on the map in the Levant, it would firmly place the Regional Arabs in a culturally downward spiral with all the Allied Powers stepping in to quell the disturbance. It would probably spell the end of Islamic countries and put an end to all the Middle East and Persian Gulf nations. Remember, in WWI, four Empires fell. And no one is going to allow an Arab Nation, with a past history of association with terrorism, to have a nuclear weapon.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[toastman]

Toast, I'm not trying to vilify all Jewish people; I'm trying to point out to everyone who has never visited Israel, the West Bank, or Gaza how biased some Jewish people (and their supporters) are when it comes to criticizing racist, religious fundamentalism and the role it plays in Palestine.

Your side is absolutely right to criticize racist religious Arabs for their desire to exterminate the Jews in Israel; however, imho, you do yourself a disservice when you don't condemn the significant number of elite Jews in Israel, like the chief military rabbi who labelled Operation Cast Lead a "religious war."

"Chief military rabbi, Brigadier General Avichai Rontzki, called Operation Cast Lead a 'religious war' in which it was 'immoral' to show mercy to an enemy of 'murderers'. Many others feel the same way, prominently among them graduates of Hesder Yeshivat schools that combine extremist religious indoctrination with military service to defend the Jewish state."

Al-Ahram Weekly | Focus | Religious fundamentalism in Israel

Would you be surprised to find out the biggest threat to Israel comes from its most religious citizens?

I don't agree that they're the biggest threat, but I do believe that the religious extremists on both sides are one of the main factors as to why peaceis a long way away, if it even reaches there.
Do you believe that being a big threat to the country is the same as being the main deterrent in a peace deal being reached ?

Good question.
I would think the biggest threat to both nations is their religious fundamentalists.
Since the monopoly of violence is controlled by Jews, I don't see any potential for negotiations among equals leading to a two-state solution.
Do you think religion could divide the Jewish state, leading to the world's first civil war with nuclear weapons available to both sides?

Anything is possible, but I doubt that would occur. Then again, I don't have a crystal ball

 

[georgephillip]

George I think your anti-religious mania is preventing you from understanding just how tiny is the extreme end of the religious fringe upon which you've fixated there..... the entire idea of 'supremacism' is actually ANATHEMA to mainstream and normative Judaism (ie, Reform, Recon, Conservative, Orthodox 'streams' and Ashkenazi/Sephardi/Mizrachi cultures) .

I'm tired of your pushing this rabid extremist swill as though it's some 'legit' part of a discussion. LOOK at you sources, all avowed enemies of the State of Israel, and IMHO of the Jewish People (yeah, yeah, technically the individuals you've cited are the children of Jewish parents, but they seem to be stuck in the 'rebellious' phase).

No one has denied that extremist nutbars exist within the Jewish religious community. I DO wonder at your continual attempt to focus on this minute group of far extremists, especially since you've already found it necessary to try to explain that you're not attempting to demonize the Jewish people as a whole..... Not that I think you have the slightest concern for how insulting or disgusting your words are to any of us, LOL!

I'm not the least bit interested in discussing your malignant fantasies regarding the future of Israel nor the Jewish People. You'll have to proceed with such daydreams without me.........

Israel Under Siege Again?

Your version of "legit" discussion always assumes that Israel has no partner for peace because Arabs refuse to recognize Israel as a Jewish state, eternally conflating the standard diplomatic practice that states are recognized, but not privileged sectors within them.

"Nutbar" Jews have a disproportionate impact in this war of ideas because their state has an overwhelming military advantage over its occupied subjects. If the prospect of "malignant fantasies" truly repulses you, imagine how it feels to those living under Israel's malignant mushroom-cloud reality.

 

[georgephillip]

georgephillip, et al,

Dangerous ground.

Good question.
I would think the biggest threat to both nations is their religious fundamentalists.
Since the monopoly of violence is controlled by Jews, I don't see any potential for negotiations among equals leading to a two-state solution.
Do you think religion could divide the Jewish state, leading to the world's first civil war with nuclear weapons available to both sides?

(COMMENT)

There probably is very little question to the idea that "religious extremism" is a major regional threat. Clearly there is a potential for Sunni 'vs' Shi'ite (Hezbollah, Iran, Syria in conflict with Hamas, Jordanian, Saudi Arabia); as well as the wider Jewish 'vs' Islamic rivalry.

While I totally disagree that Israel has a "monopoly of violence;" the two-state solution (however many options there are now) is contingent on the premise that the Hostile Arab/Palestinian (HoAP) evolves to the degree that Israel can withdrawal without fear of the HoAP re-building an insurgency that threatens the sovereign integrity of Israel.

A nuclear conflict is a dead-end for both cultures (Jewish 'vs' Islamic). In such an exchange, the consequences will be devastating for the heritage of both sides. In addition to the threat it would pose to every religious site on the map in the Levant, it would firmly place the Regional Arabs in a culturally downward spiral with all the Allied Powers stepping in to quell the disturbance. It would probably spell the end of Islamic countries and put an end to all the Middle East and Persian Gulf nations. Remember, in WWI, four Empires fell. And no one is going to allow an Arab Nation, with a past history of association with terrorism, to have a nuclear weapon.

Most Respectfully,
R

Rocco...how can anyone as educated and experienced as yourself honestly claim that Israel does not possess a monopoly of violence over those it occupies?

"See also: Israel and weapons of mass destruction
Israel is widely believed to possess nuclear weapons[6][7] and to be the sixth country in the world to have developed them.[1]

"It is one of four nuclear-armed countries not recognized as a Nuclear Weapons State by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the others being India, Pakistan and North Korea.[8]"

Nuclear weapons and Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What final solution do you see for Israel's 21st Century Samson Complex?

"Some important Twentieth century Hebrew poems have also been written about the Bible hero. More recently, elite Israeli combat units have been named 'Samson', and the Israeli nuclear program was called the 'Samson Option'.[1]

"Noam Chomsky and others have said Israel suffers from a 'Samson complex' which could lead to the destruction of itself as well as its Arab enemies.[1]"

Samson in popular culture - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[toastman]

George, why do you think Israel acquired nuclear weapons ?

 

[RoccoR]

georgephillip, et al,

The use of Max Weber terminology is both confusing and yet understandable for people who understand the context of "a community successfully claiming authority on legitimate use of physical force over a given territory."

But one has to also remember that some people {politely using PF Tinmore and SherriMunnerlyn (Tinmore/Munnerly) as author examples} have made some convincing arguments that the Arab/Palestinian is legitimately resisting occupation and therefore entitled to use any and means necessary to repel the occupation force.

If you concur with the Tinmore/Munnerly philosophy, this would put the "monopoly of violence" on the side of the Hostile Arab/Palestinian (HoAP) as the "source of legitimate physical force."

Rocco...how can anyone as educated and experienced as yourself honestly claim that Israel does not possess a monopoly of violence over those it occupies?

(COMMENT)

Rather than the Weber Concept (monopoly of violence), which is not really a strategy, I believe you should consider a broader analysis. From my perspective, you are clearly trying to suggest that Israel has maintained military superiority; which should not be confused with a monopoly of violence.

From the HoAP perspective, there has been a shift in strategies form the "overwhelming Force Concept" (multiple Armies attacking from multiple directions) to a gradual assumption of Clausewitz concept of "Primary Trinity" [(1) primordial violence, hatred, and enmity; (2) the play of chance and probability; and (3) war's element of subordination to rational policy)].

From the Israeli standpoint, they have chosen to integrate several strategies:

• Strategy of Persistance strategy – Destroy the means by which the HoAP sustains itself and supports itself.
  
• Exhaustion Strategy – A strategy targets resources of a country, in its ability to sustain the insurgency.
  
• Denial – A strategy reduces HoAP ability to wage war, militarily, politically, economically, and financially.
  
• Decapitation – A strategy of induced paralysis by targeting political leadership (C3I - Command, Control, Communication and Intelligence).

"See also: Israel and weapons of mass destruction Israel is widely believed to possess nuclear weapons[6][7] and to be the sixth country in the world to have developed them.[1]

"It is one of four nuclear-armed countries not recognized as a Nuclear Weapons State by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the others being India, Pakistan and North Korea.[8]"

(COMMENT)

Having a nuclear capacity is as much a disadvantage as it is an advantage. For all practical purposes, the State of Israel, even if it has such an advantage, cannot use them until they are at the point of total destruction (the last bullet of the last battle). The NPT has no real play in the Deployment Policy and Strategy of a Nuclear Device.

What final solution do you see for Israel's 21st Century Samson Complex?

"Some important Twentieth century Hebrew poems have also been written about the Bible hero. More recently, elite Israeli combat units have been named 'Samson', and the Israeli nuclear program was called the 'Samson Option'.[1]

"Noam Chomsky and others have said Israel suffers from a 'Samson complex' which could lead to the destruction of itself as well as its Arab enemies.[1]"

(COMMENT)

Yes, the “Masada or Samson complex” (destruction of itself as well as its Arab enemies) is something the Arab League should take seriously. What is the "worst case scenario?" (The last bullets of the Last Battle!) Faced with eminent destruction and the end of your cultural home, what would you destroy of your enemy to make the balance equal (to the extent possible)?

• Jerusalem
• Mecca
• Medina
• Qom
• Karabala

Or, would you go after the enemy strongholds:

• Amman
• Baghdad
• Beirut
• Cairo
• Damascus
• Riyadh
• Tehran

OR! Since it is "eminent destruction and the end of your cultural home" - before your eyes close - would you do them all?

If you are the Arab League, or the senior leadership within the Islamic culture, what consequences would you be willing to accept as reasonable?

And, if you are the former Allied Powers, given the past history of behaviors, would it be worth intervening? Or would the prevailing opinion be to let the chips fall where they may, and just deal with the remainder and put it all under trusteeship after the guns draw silent?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[toastman]

Rocco, concerning the legit arguments of Tinmore and Sherri stating that the Palestinians have resisted the occupation, can you elaborate on that please? What examples did they give ?
As far as I'm concerned, launching rockets into unarmed civilian areas is not resisting.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Rocco, concerning the legit arguments of Tinmore and Sherri stating that the Palestinians have resisted the occupation, can you elaborate on that please? What examples did they give ?
As far as I'm concerned, launching rockets into unarmed civilian areas is not resisting.

This should be good.

 

[RoccoR]

toastman, P F Tinmore, et al,

First, I think I used the term: "convincing arguments," relative to the Tinmore/Munnerly position. And then made an association between their arguments and the wider Max Weber concept, as an underlying "source of legitimate physical force;" in the form of a rhetorical question: "If you concur."

I don't buy-in to the argument. I tend to be more aligned with the SECGEN when he says: "Nothing can justify terrorism — ever. No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts."

Rocco, concerning the legit arguments of Tinmore and Sherri stating that the Palestinians have resisted the occupation, can you elaborate on that please? What examples did they give ?
As far as I'm concerned, launching rockets into unarmed civilian areas is not resisting.

This should be good.

(COMMENT)

These are just a few statements, in recent times, that come to mind. Remembering that my concept of "resisting occupation" is different that the Tinmore/Munnerly concept; and what is appropriate resistance. See more at a similar discussion on this view. #105 (permalink)

Holy smokescreen, Batman.

How does all that relate to people defending themselves from occupation?

Israel occupies Gaza and the WB and East Jerusalem and the Occupied have a lawful right to resist Occupation. Until IDF terrorists and war criminal illegal settlers leave, Palestinians have the right to resist their Occupation. This sovereignty argument is raised only by Zions whores and it has no merit as long as the Occupation continues

Rocco, suicide bombings are a thing of the past in Palestine, they stopped years ago. Just let it go, this baseless claim they desire suicide bombings and love to commit suicide bombings, it is not true. And let it go, your hate and demonization of them, let it all go. Free yourself of all this hate you are enslaved by. Occupations are not supposed to last over 40 years, the Israeli Occupation of Palestine became unlawful a long time ago. All that is lacking is an Opinion by The Intl Court of Justice confirming this. But I read a Special Rapporteurs Report years ago concluding the Occupation was unlawful. And people have the right to resist Occupations, their resistance, even armed resistance, is 100 percent lawful under intl law. Israel has no right to claim self defense as long as her unlawful Occupation of Palestine continues.

Israel occupies Gaza and the WB and East Jerusalem and the Occupied have a lawful right to resist Occupation. Until IDF terrorists and war criminal illegal settlers leave, Palestinians have the right to resist their Occupation. This sovereignty argument is raised only by Zions whores and it has no merit as long as the Occupation continues

That's what it is all about. Everybody has the right to defend their country.

I remind everyone Resistance to Occupation is 100% lawful under international law, and that Resistance may lawfully include armed resistance to the Occupation.

Arms and weapons enter Gaza completely lawfully under international law!

Sherri

Hamas does not operate outside of Palestine.

Hamas only attacks the occupation. The religion does not matter.

Of course. They aren't a global group. They are specifically for their people. They only are against the occupation of their lands

Hamas is recognized as a national liberation organization by the UN and the majority of the rest of the world.

That terrorist crap is just part of Israel's propaganda.

And the rockets will continue until the occupation ends.

Will you for ONCE just cut the bullshit??!

THERE IS NO OCCUPATION IN GAZA!

So those rockets has nothing to do with any "occupation"!

Everyone in the world except Israel says Gaza is still occupied.

That said, two thirds of the people in Gaza cannot return to their homes because they are occupied.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[toastman]

The problem with Tinmore and Sherri, is that they don't know what 'terrorism' really is..
They consider what the IDF and IAF does to be terrorism,...im guessing its because the casualties on the Palestinian side are always way higher..

 

[toastman]

But after reading Sherri's posts since I join USMB almost a year ago, I find Sherri's opinions to be useless...she constantly lies and gets caught up in her own lies

 

[toastman]

Rocco, concerning the legit arguments of Tinmore and Sherri stating that the Palestinians have resisted the occupation, can you elaborate on that please? What examples did they give ?
As far as I'm concerned, launching rockets into unarmed civilian areas is not resisting.

This should be good.

Maybe you can explain how launching rockets into civilian areas is 'resisting'

 

[georgephillip]

George, why do you think Israel acquired nuclear weapons ?

Quite possibly, for all the right reasons, Toast.

"Israel's first Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion was 'nearly obsessed' with obtaining nuclear weapons to prevent the Holocaust from recurring. He stated, 'What Einstein, Oppenheimer, and Teller, the three of them are Jews, made for the United States, could also be done by scientists in Israel, for their own people'.[17]

"Ben-Gurion decided to recruit Jewish scientists from abroad even before the end of the 1948 Arab–Israeli War that established Israel's independence."

What advantage do you believe Israel gains from its policy of nuclear ambiguity?

Nuclear weapons and Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[toastman]

George, why do you think Israel acquired nuclear weapons ?

Quite possibly, for all the right reasons, Toast.

"Israel's first Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion was 'nearly obsessed' with obtaining nuclear weapons to prevent the Holocaust from recurring. He stated, 'What Einstein, Oppenheimer, and Teller, the three of them are Jews, made for the United States, could also be done by scientists in Israel, for their own people'.[17]

"Ben-Gurion decided to recruit Jewish scientists from abroad even before the end of the 1948 Arab–Israeli War that established Israel's independence."

What advantage do you believe Israel gains from its policy of nuclear ambiguity?

Nuclear weapons and Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That's actually a good question. To be honest, I don't have a clue.
Weather they confirm or deny it, does it really make a difference considering everyone knows they have them ? I don't think so personally
Israel has an ambiguity policy for targeted assassinations as well
When they are question about the alleged assassination, they don't confirm nor deny it (btw, does the word 'ambiguity' apply to this as well ?)
I don't think anyone knows the reason , except Israel. Consider it an executive decision

 

[P F Tinmore]

The problem with Tinmore and Sherri, is that they don't know what 'terrorism' really is..
They consider what the IDF and IAF does to be terrorism,...im guessing its because the casualties on the Palestinian side are always way higher..

It is an Israeli propaganda campaign.